Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Abortion Discussion

Options
1…310311313315316…334

Comments

  • Options
    #9362
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    oldrnwisr wrote: »
    You really ought not to argue using misinformation.

    Firstly, with regard to cleft palate. There were 184,571 abortions performed in the UK in 2014. Of these, 3099 were carried out under ground E of the legislation (foetal abnormality). Cleft palate was named as the principal medical condition in just 10 of these cases. None of the cleft palate related abortions were late-term. In fact, in total only 202 of the 3099 abortions performed under ground E were carried out over 24 weeks and most of these were carried out due to serious nervous system malformations.
    Secondly, cleft palate is mentioned as the principal medical condidtion in just 10 cases but is mentioned in the clinical notes of 29, meaning that cleft palate was present in a foetus which also had some other more serious malformation. You see, cleft palate on it's own can be successfully treated but it is often accompanied by much more serious defects such as Loeys-Dietz syndrome, Stickler's syndrome or Treacher Collins syndrome so it's not always a guarantee that cleft palate can be treated successfully.

    This is also an important point to bear in mind when talking about Down's syndrome. Most people who raise Down's syndrome as a negative in an abortion discussion usually have little or no knowledge of the nature of Down's syndrome and just how different each case can be. The reality, you'll find is much more complicated than the black and white world you seem to occupy. Down's syndrome is hugely varied with some symptoms such as congenital heart disease only occurring in 40% of cases. While most Down's syndrome patients suffer mild to moderate intellectual disability, there are some cases where there are severe intellectual and physical disabilities. Taking a one-size fits all view of what Down's syndrome really is is wrong and unhelpful.


    UK 2014 Abortion Statistics Report
    UK 2014 Abortion Statistics Datasets (Excel)
    Your argument for abortion is that there are some hard cases and others that might not be treatable?

    Babies are aborted because they are Downs Syndrome - that's it. The degree of disability doesn't come into it, unless it's in the 'advice' given to expectant mothers.
    Something tells me you'd be good at that.


  • Options
    #9363
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,493 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    Your argument for abortion is that there are some hard cases and others that might not be treatable?

    Babies are aborted because they are Downs Syndrome - that's it. The degree of disability doesn't come into it, unless it's in the 'advice' given to expectant mothers.
    Something tells me you'd be good at that.

    Down's syndrome is not a minor disability. Irish children with Downs are given less help to overcome their disabilities than those in the UK. So lets not pretend our country cares about children with Downs, once they are born. This is a pro-forced birth country, not a pro-life one.


  • Options
    #9364
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Lots of things, particularly a traditional approach to the family and to child rearing that the rest of the UK doesn't really have. It's not surprising that rates of abortions are lower. But the law is the result of that cultural difference, not the cause of it.

    Otherwise you're claiming that Irish people, north and south, are mainly anti-abortion, with the exception of women of child bearing age, who are only prevented from having abortions right left and centre because of the law that the rest of the population imposes on them.

    If that were really the case, there would be an urgent discussion to be had as to why the only people whose lives and health were potentially at risk from pregnancy were not finding any support from the rest of the population concerning their worries. Is that really what you think?
    The Welsh Scots and English don't love their children the way we do? I see.

    Social mores follow the law. If you want to make something socially acceptable then make it legal. Many people can't tell the difference between law and morality.


  • Options
    #9365
    oldrnwisr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭oldrnwisr


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    Your argument for abortion is that there are some hard cases and others that might not be treatable?

    Babies are aborted because they are Downs Syndrome - that's it. The degree of disability doesn't come into it, unless it's in the 'advice' given to expectant mothers.
    Something tells me you'd be good at that.

    I'm not arguing for anything.

    You on the other hand are trying to argue against abortion and raising spurious points such as Down's syndrome and cleft palate to do so. I'm just pointing out why your argument is bollocks.

    Your argument, such as it is, is built on the faulty assumption that, well Down's syndrome isn't really that bad so we shouldn't allow abortions for diagnoses of Down's syndrome on that basis. The reality, however, is that Down's syndrome can result in serious mental and physical disabilities which some parents decide not to go through with, either for their own sake or for the diminished quality of life which the child might have.

    You're trying to make a fallacious argument against abortion, specifically an emotional appeal to consequences. I'm not arguing for any position other than showing your argument to be false.


  • Options
    #9366
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Down's syndrome is not a minor disability. Irish children with Downs are given less help to overcome their disabilities than those in the UK. So lets not pretend our country cares about children with Downs, once they are born. This is a pro-forced birth country, not a pro-life one.
    Your argument is that since a child may not have a good (your version) life, we should kill her at the first opportunity.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9367
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,493 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    The Welsh Scots and English don't love their children the way we do? I see.
    Where did I say that? You're reduced to straw manning again.
    Social mores follow the law. If you want to make something socially acceptable then make it legal. Many people can't tell the difference between law and morality.
    In a democracy, the law tends to follow the will of the people, not the other way around.

    As for people not distinguishing between the law and morality, speak for yourself. I disagree. But I'll remind you that your belief is one shared by theocracies like Iran and ISIS, and is not usually the legal basis for developed democracies.


  • Options
    #9368
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    Your argument is that since a child may not have a good (your version) life, we should kill her at the first opportunity.

    Once more, though I know you won't listen:

    Nobody is talking about killing children.


  • Options
    #9369
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,493 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    Your argument is that since a child may not have a good (your version) life, we should kill her at the first opportunity.

    No it isn't, and rather than engage with you further, I'm reporting this.


  • Options
    #9370
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    oldrnwisr wrote: »
    I'm not arguing for anything.

    You on the other hand are trying to argue against abortion and raising spurious points such as Down's syndrome and cleft palate to do so. I'm just pointing out why you're argument is bollocks.

    Your argument, such as it is, is built on the faulty assumption that, well Down's syndrome isn't really that bad so we shouldn't allow abortions for diagnoses of Down's syndrome on that basis. The reality, however, is that Down's syndrome can result in serious mental and physical disabilities which some parents decide not to go through with, either for their own sake or for the diminished quality of life which the child might have.

    You're trying to make a fallacious argument against abortion, specifically an emotional appeal to consequences. I'm not arguing for any position other than showing your argument to be false.
    I've stated that children are aborted because of DS. You're agreeing with me and offering justification for the disposal of the disabled.

    But you'll have difficulty in convincing me that caring for somebody involves killing them.


  • Options
    #9371
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    volchitsa wrote: »
    No it isn't, and rather than engage with you further, I'm reporting this.
    You could always try explaining yourself.
    But if you're out of arguments ....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9372
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Kev W wrote: »
    Once more, though I know you won't listen:

    Nobody is talking about killing children.
    An unborn is a child. Abortion is the killing of the unborn.

    What am I missing?


  • Options
    #9373
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    An unborn is a child. Abortion is the killing of the unborn.

    What am I missing?

    That an unborn is not a child.


  • Options
    #9374
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Kev W wrote: »
    That an unborn is not a child.
    Ok, let's assume that much is true.

    I want you to explain to me, when and how an unborn becomes a child. What is the process that transforms this little thing into a child by it being moved from the womb to the fresh air?

    Believe me, I'm all ears.


  • Options
    #9375
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #9376
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    An unborn is a child. Abortion is the killing of the unborn.

    What am I missing?

    The unborn is a child in the same way dough is a loaf of bread. In other words it has potential but is nowhere near being the finished product.


  • Options
    #9377
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    What - no link? No evidence? No peer-reviewed science?

    I think we can all agree that's an F minus.


  • Options
    #9378
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    eviltwin wrote: »
    The unborn is a child in the same way dough is a loaf of bread. In other words it has potential but is nowhere near being the finished product.
    Is that brown bread or pitta bread? I like bread.


  • Options
    #9379
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #9380
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    The Christianity forum is thataway -->


  • Options
    #9381
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9382
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Good for you. Any chance you could do it in the correct forum?
    You may have noticed 'Atheism & Agnosticism' on the way in.


  • Options
    #9383
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #9384
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    What - no link? No evidence? No peer-reviewed science?

    I think we can all agree that's an F minus.

    That is hilarious coming from someone who has continuously ignored information that doesn't support their point of view!


  • Options
    #9385
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    There are also approximately 60 cases per year where the child is aborted alive and then left to die of hypothermia and shock.
    Two Sheds wrote: »
    An unborn is a child. Abortion is the killing of the unborn.

    What am I missing?
    :confused:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #9386
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    Delirium wrote: »
    :confused:
    I'm sure that even you can figure that one out. :)


  • Options
    #9387
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    I'm sure that even you can figure that one out. :)

    If you can't explain your own contradictory waffle then just admit it, don't do the dance. Don't pretend that it makes so much sense that only an idiot can't see it. Nobody buys it.


  • Options
    #9388
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    I'm sure that even you can figure that one out. :)

    Afraid not, hence the confused image. Care to explain how both statements can be true?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #9389
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    robdonn wrote: »
    That is hilarious coming from someone who has continuously ignored information that doesn't support their point of view!
    You own posts consist almost entirely of attempting (badly) to pick holes in the posts of others.

    But you appear very reluctant to post any justification for your support for abortion.
    That's not very persuasive.


  • Options
    #9390
    Two Sheds
    Registered Users Posts: 316 ✭✭Two Sheds


    robdonn wrote: »
    If you can't explain your own contradictory waffle then just admit it, don't do the dance. Don't pretend that it makes so much sense that only an idiot can't see it. Nobody buys it.
    Are you being deliberately obtuse? It seems so.

    Abortion is designed and intended to kill, and the job is done ... one way or another.

    You support abortion but you're not posting in support of abortion practices. Funny that ...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9391
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    Two Sheds wrote: »
    You own posts consist almost entirely of attempting (badly) to pick holes in the posts of others.

    But you appear very reluctant to post any justification for your support for abortion.
    That's not very persuasive.

    Stop leaving such big holes in your posts then!

    And my personal views on the topic are irrelevant, you are trying to argue a point using false, misleading or misunderstood information. Every time that someone points that out you either dodge, avoid or just get really snarky.

    I am not trying to protect or defend abortion, I am not putting forward an argument for abortion.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement